{"title":"充分减轻体重可减少糖尿病代谢综合征患者的心血管并发症","authors":"G. Cocco, Stefano Pandolfi, V. Rousson","doi":"10.1159/000083662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The metabolic syndrome is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular complications. Especially patients with evident cardiac pathology are at high risk for further complications. A sufficient weight reduction would improve the metabolic pathology and reduce the cardiovascular risk. Unfortunately, overweight and obese patients, even with complicated coronary heart disease, do not alter lifestyles regarding fat intake and physical activity, and in a quarter of these patients body weight increases in the follow-up period. Nonetheless, these patients need a weight reduction to be protected from further cardiovascular complications. Therefore, in overweight patients with insulin resistance in whom lifestyle recommendations have failed, orlistat has been used as an adjunct to decrease significantly overweight and to improve the metabolic pathology without increasing mortality. In our opinion, orlistat could also be an adjunct to lifestyle changes in adipose, diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome and established heart pathology and signs of incipient cardiac dysfunction. Furthermore, we hypothesize that following a sufficient weight reduction improvements in metabolic pathology and, more important to us, in cardiac dysfunction should be observed. Methods: We selected 90 adipose patients with the metabolic syndrome, diabetes type 2, hypertension, mostly with coronary heart disease and concomitant cardiac dysfunction. Cardiac dysfunction was stated when the amplitude of dyspnea was greater than class 2 of the New York Heart Association (NYHA) and when resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was <50%. Patients attended standardized nutritional counseling sessions. The caloric restriction was sufficient to create a deficit of 500 calories per day with <30% of total calories derived from fat. All patients were also enrolled in a standardized physical program and were also encouraged to walk briskly for at least 30 min per day. Patients were divided into two groups. Orlistat (120 mg t.i.d.) and placebo (1 capsule t.i.d.) were administered according to a double-blind protocol. Results: Baseline pathology was similar in the two groups, with the exception of hemoglobin (Hb) A1C, which was slightly higher in the orlistat group, the difference being statistically significant (p = 0.031). Unfortunately, lifestyle changes (diet and exercise) induced only small changes with respect to overweight in the placebo group (no orlistat). The metabolic pathology and the cardiac dysfunction did not improve. As expected, in the other group treated with orlistat in addition to lifestyle changes, weight and body mass index decreased significantly (p < 0.001 and p = 0.013, respectively). In parallel the metabolic pathology, especially dyslipidemia, was significantly reduced. Total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides decreased, while HDL cholesterol increased. These changes were very significant (p < 0.001, p = 0.001, p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Uricemia decreased slightly (p = 0.043). The diabetic pathology was also reduced. Insulin sensitivity increased in both groups, but the within group difference was not significant (p = 0.093). Glycemia and Hb A1 decreased, and serum insulin increased. These changes were significant (p = 0.005, p = 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively). With orlistat treatment, systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate decreased. The differences from placebo were small but statistically significant (p = 0.025, p = 0.012 and p = 0.039, respectively). As hypothesized, in the orlistat group dyspnea decreased (NYHA class improved) and the LVEF increased from 47.47 ± 3.74 to 51.76 ± 3.66%, and this difference was highly significant compared to placebo (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Unfortunately, recommendations regarding lifestyle changes (diet counseling and physical exercise) may be insufficient to reduce overweight even in patients who need this effect. On the other hand, atherogenic dyslipidemia and glycemia can be decreased with an adequate weight reduction. Our data show that a weight decrease of only 5.6 kg is sufficient to improve significantly atherogenic dyslipidemia, even if most patients remain obese since hemodynamics and cardiac function are improved. We would prefer to obtain these effects by lifestyle changes (increased physical activity and reduced caloric intake combined with a reduced fat consumption). But when these efforts fail to achieve an effect, orlistat may be a valuable adjunct to achieve these goals. Of course this drug should not be given indefinitely, because the long-term effects on the absorption of fat vitamins are poorly known and potentially dangerous.","PeriodicalId":87985,"journal":{"name":"Heartdrug : excellence in cardiovascular trials","volume":"5 1","pages":"68 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000083662","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sufficient Weight Reduction Decreases Cardiovascular Complications in Diabetic Patients with the Metabolic Syndrome\",\"authors\":\"G. Cocco, Stefano Pandolfi, V. Rousson\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000083662\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The metabolic syndrome is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular complications. Especially patients with evident cardiac pathology are at high risk for further complications. A sufficient weight reduction would improve the metabolic pathology and reduce the cardiovascular risk. Unfortunately, overweight and obese patients, even with complicated coronary heart disease, do not alter lifestyles regarding fat intake and physical activity, and in a quarter of these patients body weight increases in the follow-up period. Nonetheless, these patients need a weight reduction to be protected from further cardiovascular complications. Therefore, in overweight patients with insulin resistance in whom lifestyle recommendations have failed, orlistat has been used as an adjunct to decrease significantly overweight and to improve the metabolic pathology without increasing mortality. In our opinion, orlistat could also be an adjunct to lifestyle changes in adipose, diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome and established heart pathology and signs of incipient cardiac dysfunction. Furthermore, we hypothesize that following a sufficient weight reduction improvements in metabolic pathology and, more important to us, in cardiac dysfunction should be observed. Methods: We selected 90 adipose patients with the metabolic syndrome, diabetes type 2, hypertension, mostly with coronary heart disease and concomitant cardiac dysfunction. Cardiac dysfunction was stated when the amplitude of dyspnea was greater than class 2 of the New York Heart Association (NYHA) and when resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was <50%. Patients attended standardized nutritional counseling sessions. The caloric restriction was sufficient to create a deficit of 500 calories per day with <30% of total calories derived from fat. All patients were also enrolled in a standardized physical program and were also encouraged to walk briskly for at least 30 min per day. Patients were divided into two groups. Orlistat (120 mg t.i.d.) and placebo (1 capsule t.i.d.) were administered according to a double-blind protocol. Results: Baseline pathology was similar in the two groups, with the exception of hemoglobin (Hb) A1C, which was slightly higher in the orlistat group, the difference being statistically significant (p = 0.031). Unfortunately, lifestyle changes (diet and exercise) induced only small changes with respect to overweight in the placebo group (no orlistat). The metabolic pathology and the cardiac dysfunction did not improve. As expected, in the other group treated with orlistat in addition to lifestyle changes, weight and body mass index decreased significantly (p < 0.001 and p = 0.013, respectively). In parallel the metabolic pathology, especially dyslipidemia, was significantly reduced. Total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides decreased, while HDL cholesterol increased. These changes were very significant (p < 0.001, p = 0.001, p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Uricemia decreased slightly (p = 0.043). The diabetic pathology was also reduced. Insulin sensitivity increased in both groups, but the within group difference was not significant (p = 0.093). Glycemia and Hb A1 decreased, and serum insulin increased. These changes were significant (p = 0.005, p = 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively). With orlistat treatment, systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate decreased. The differences from placebo were small but statistically significant (p = 0.025, p = 0.012 and p = 0.039, respectively). As hypothesized, in the orlistat group dyspnea decreased (NYHA class improved) and the LVEF increased from 47.47 ± 3.74 to 51.76 ± 3.66%, and this difference was highly significant compared to placebo (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Unfortunately, recommendations regarding lifestyle changes (diet counseling and physical exercise) may be insufficient to reduce overweight even in patients who need this effect. On the other hand, atherogenic dyslipidemia and glycemia can be decreased with an adequate weight reduction. Our data show that a weight decrease of only 5.6 kg is sufficient to improve significantly atherogenic dyslipidemia, even if most patients remain obese since hemodynamics and cardiac function are improved. We would prefer to obtain these effects by lifestyle changes (increased physical activity and reduced caloric intake combined with a reduced fat consumption). But when these efforts fail to achieve an effect, orlistat may be a valuable adjunct to achieve these goals. Of course this drug should not be given indefinitely, because the long-term effects on the absorption of fat vitamins are poorly known and potentially dangerous.\",\"PeriodicalId\":87985,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heartdrug : excellence in cardiovascular trials\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"68 - 74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000083662\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heartdrug : excellence in cardiovascular trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000083662\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heartdrug : excellence in cardiovascular trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000083662","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18
摘要
背景:代谢综合征与心血管并发症的风险增加有关。特别是有明显心脏病变的患者,发生进一步并发症的风险较高。充分减轻体重可以改善代谢病理,降低心血管风险。不幸的是,超重和肥胖患者,即使患有复杂的冠心病,也不会改变脂肪摄入和身体活动方面的生活方式,四分之一的患者在随访期间体重增加。尽管如此,这些患者需要减轻体重以避免进一步的心血管并发症。因此,在生活方式建议无效的超重胰岛素抵抗患者中,奥利司他被用作辅助治疗,以显著减少超重和改善代谢病理,而不增加死亡率。在我们看来,奥利司他也可以辅助脂肪,糖尿病患者的代谢综合征,建立心脏病理和早期心功能障碍的迹象生活方式的改变。此外,我们假设,在充分减轻体重后,代谢病理的改善,对我们来说更重要的是,心功能障碍的改善应该被观察到。方法:选择代谢综合征、2型糖尿病、高血压患者90例,以冠心病合并心功能障碍患者居多。当呼吸困难的幅度大于纽约心脏协会(NYHA)的2级,静息左心室射血分数(LVEF) <50%时,即为心功能障碍。患者参加标准化的营养咨询会议。热量限制足以造成每天500卡路里的不足,总热量的30%以下来自脂肪。所有患者都参加了一个标准化的体育项目,并被鼓励每天至少快走30分钟。患者分为两组。奥利司他(每次120毫克)和安慰剂(每次1粒胶囊)按照双盲方案给予。结果:两组患者基线病理基本一致,仅奥利司他组血红蛋白(Hb) A1C略高,差异有统计学意义(p = 0.031)。不幸的是,生活方式的改变(饮食和运动)只引起了安慰剂组(没有奥利司他)超重的微小变化。代谢病理及心功能障碍无明显改善。正如预期的那样,在奥利司他治疗的另一组中,除了改变生活方式外,体重和体重指数也显著下降(p < 0.001和p = 0.013)。同时,代谢病理,特别是血脂异常,显著降低。总胆固醇、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇和甘油三酯降低,而高密度脂蛋白胆固醇升高。这些变化非常显著(p < 0.001, p = 0.001, p = 0.001和p < 0.001)。尿毒症略有下降(p = 0.043)。糖尿病病理也有所减轻。两组胰岛素敏感性均升高,组内差异无统计学意义(p = 0.093)。血糖和Hb A1降低,血清胰岛素升高。这些变化是显著的(p = 0.005, p = 0.001和p = 0.003)。奥利司他治疗后,收缩压(SBP)、舒张压(DBP)和心率下降。与安慰剂相比,差异虽小,但具有统计学意义(p = 0.025, p = 0.012, p = 0.039)。根据假设,奥利司他组呼吸困难减轻(NYHA分级改善),LVEF从47.47±3.74增加到51.76±3.66%,与安慰剂组相比差异极显著(p < 0.001)。结论:不幸的是,关于生活方式改变的建议(饮食咨询和体育锻炼)可能不足以减少超重,即使对需要这种效果的患者也是如此。另一方面,动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常和血糖可以通过适当的减肥来降低。我们的数据显示,即使大多数患者由于血液动力学和心功能的改善而保持肥胖,体重减轻5.6 kg也足以显著改善动脉粥样硬化性血脂异常。我们更倾向于通过改变生活方式来获得这些效果(增加体力活动,减少热量摄入,同时减少脂肪消耗)。但是,当这些努力未能达到效果时,奥利司他可能是一个有价值的辅助手段来实现这些目标。当然,这种药物不应该无限期服用,因为对脂肪维生素吸收的长期影响尚不清楚,而且有潜在的危险。
Sufficient Weight Reduction Decreases Cardiovascular Complications in Diabetic Patients with the Metabolic Syndrome
Background: The metabolic syndrome is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular complications. Especially patients with evident cardiac pathology are at high risk for further complications. A sufficient weight reduction would improve the metabolic pathology and reduce the cardiovascular risk. Unfortunately, overweight and obese patients, even with complicated coronary heart disease, do not alter lifestyles regarding fat intake and physical activity, and in a quarter of these patients body weight increases in the follow-up period. Nonetheless, these patients need a weight reduction to be protected from further cardiovascular complications. Therefore, in overweight patients with insulin resistance in whom lifestyle recommendations have failed, orlistat has been used as an adjunct to decrease significantly overweight and to improve the metabolic pathology without increasing mortality. In our opinion, orlistat could also be an adjunct to lifestyle changes in adipose, diabetic patients with the metabolic syndrome and established heart pathology and signs of incipient cardiac dysfunction. Furthermore, we hypothesize that following a sufficient weight reduction improvements in metabolic pathology and, more important to us, in cardiac dysfunction should be observed. Methods: We selected 90 adipose patients with the metabolic syndrome, diabetes type 2, hypertension, mostly with coronary heart disease and concomitant cardiac dysfunction. Cardiac dysfunction was stated when the amplitude of dyspnea was greater than class 2 of the New York Heart Association (NYHA) and when resting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was <50%. Patients attended standardized nutritional counseling sessions. The caloric restriction was sufficient to create a deficit of 500 calories per day with <30% of total calories derived from fat. All patients were also enrolled in a standardized physical program and were also encouraged to walk briskly for at least 30 min per day. Patients were divided into two groups. Orlistat (120 mg t.i.d.) and placebo (1 capsule t.i.d.) were administered according to a double-blind protocol. Results: Baseline pathology was similar in the two groups, with the exception of hemoglobin (Hb) A1C, which was slightly higher in the orlistat group, the difference being statistically significant (p = 0.031). Unfortunately, lifestyle changes (diet and exercise) induced only small changes with respect to overweight in the placebo group (no orlistat). The metabolic pathology and the cardiac dysfunction did not improve. As expected, in the other group treated with orlistat in addition to lifestyle changes, weight and body mass index decreased significantly (p < 0.001 and p = 0.013, respectively). In parallel the metabolic pathology, especially dyslipidemia, was significantly reduced. Total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides decreased, while HDL cholesterol increased. These changes were very significant (p < 0.001, p = 0.001, p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Uricemia decreased slightly (p = 0.043). The diabetic pathology was also reduced. Insulin sensitivity increased in both groups, but the within group difference was not significant (p = 0.093). Glycemia and Hb A1 decreased, and serum insulin increased. These changes were significant (p = 0.005, p = 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively). With orlistat treatment, systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate decreased. The differences from placebo were small but statistically significant (p = 0.025, p = 0.012 and p = 0.039, respectively). As hypothesized, in the orlistat group dyspnea decreased (NYHA class improved) and the LVEF increased from 47.47 ± 3.74 to 51.76 ± 3.66%, and this difference was highly significant compared to placebo (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Unfortunately, recommendations regarding lifestyle changes (diet counseling and physical exercise) may be insufficient to reduce overweight even in patients who need this effect. On the other hand, atherogenic dyslipidemia and glycemia can be decreased with an adequate weight reduction. Our data show that a weight decrease of only 5.6 kg is sufficient to improve significantly atherogenic dyslipidemia, even if most patients remain obese since hemodynamics and cardiac function are improved. We would prefer to obtain these effects by lifestyle changes (increased physical activity and reduced caloric intake combined with a reduced fat consumption). But when these efforts fail to achieve an effect, orlistat may be a valuable adjunct to achieve these goals. Of course this drug should not be given indefinitely, because the long-term effects on the absorption of fat vitamins are poorly known and potentially dangerous.